Delirium Screening in Critically Ill Children: Secondary Analysis of the Multicenter PICU Up! Pilot Trial Dataset, 2019–2020*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the patient-level factors associated with performing daily delirium screening in PICUs with established delirium screening practices. DESIGN: A secondary analysis of 2019-2020 prospective data from the baseline phase of the PICU Up! pilot stepped-wedge multicenter trial (NCT03860168). SETTING: Six PICUs in the United States. PATIENTS: One thousand sixty-four patients who were admitted to a PICU for 3 or more days. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 1064 patients, 74% (95% CI, 71-76%) underwent delirium screening at least once during their PICU stay. On 57% of the 8965 eligible patient days, screening was conducted. The overall prevalence of delirium was 46% across all screened days, and 64% of screened patients experienced delirium at some point during their PICU stay. Factors associated with greater adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of increased daily delirium screening included PICU stay longer than 15 days compared with 1-3 days (aOR 3.36 [95% CI, 2.62-4.30]), invasive mechanical ventilation as opposed to room air (aOR 1.67 [95% CI, 1.32-2.12]), dexmedetomidine infusions (aOR 1.23 [95% CI, 1.04-1.44]) and propofol infusions (aOR 1.55 [95% CI, 1.08-2.23]). Conversely, decreased aOR of daily delirium screening was associated with female gender (aOR 0.78 [95% CI, 0.63-0.96]), and the administration of continuous infusions of opioids (aOR 0.75 [95% CI, 0.63-0.90]) or ketamine (aOR 0.48 [95% CI, 0.29-0.79]). Neither patient age, the presence of family or physical restraints, or benzodiazepine infusions were associated with daily delirium screening rates. CONCLUSIONS: In the 2019-2020 PICU UP! cohort, across six PICUs, delirium screening occurred on only 57% of days, despite the presence of established practices. Female gender, patients in the early stages of their PICU stay, and patients not receiving mechanical ventilation were associated with lower odds of daily delirium screening. Our results highlight the need for structured quality improvement processes to both standardize and increase the frequency of delirium screening.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".